Re: [boost] Clang: Open-source C/C++ front end under development

From: Chris Lattner (clattner_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-09-01 15:33:28

David's characterization is somewhat correct, but is also a bit  
simplistic.  The LLVM project does certainly use templates (including  
partial specialization etc), but we prefer to keep this as an  
implementation detail in a library.  Exposing "complex" template code  
through the public interface of a library generally make the library  
"scary" to those developers who don't consider themselves to be C++  
gurus.  This design point also reduces build time for the LLVM code  
itself.

-Chris

http://nondot.org/sabre
http://llvm.org

On Sep 1, 2007, at 11:54 AM, Larry Evans <cppljevans_at_[hidden]>  
wrote:

> On 09/01/07 13:30, David A. Greene wrote:
>> On Saturday 01 September 2007 13:12, Larry Evans wrote:
>>
>>> It maybe too late now, but I'd think boost's wave might have
>>> saved them some time in writing the preprocessor.
>>
>> Agreed.  I've been involved with llvm for about six months now and  
>> there's a
>> general fear of using anything from Boost, or templates in  
>> general.  I'm not
>> meaning to slam the llvm developers.  What they've done is really  
>> quite good.
>> But they have certain constraints (embedded, low memory, etc.) that  
>> makes them
>> hesitant to use more advanced C++ techniques.
>
> My initial reponse to this is "aren't they optimizing first, then
> correcting?"  IOW, why not use templates to ease getting a correct
> compiler, and *then* worry about satisfying the constraints?  Of  
> course,
> after thinking a bit, I'd guess that's probably oversimplifying.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost